A grievance against NHM & court order compliance is now before the PMO, alleging NHM UP closed its 17,000+ recruitment drive in defiance of a High Court directive. This situation has raised significant concerns among job seekers in Uttar Pradesh, who were eagerly awaiting recruitment opportunities within the National Health Mission. The abrupt termination of the recruitment drive not only impacts the livelihoods of thousands but also undermines the judicial authority of the High Court. Many believe that adherence to the court’s orders is paramount for upholding justice and accountability in public service recruitment processes. The PMO’s involvement in this matter highlights the gravity of the issue, as stakeholders from various sectors are calling for transparency and adherence to legal mandates to foster trust in government operations.
Key Takeaways
- A grievance against NHM & Court Order has reached the PMO, alleging NHM UP closed its recruitment drive against a High Court directive.
- The recruitment drive aimed to fill over 17,000 healthcare positions but faced controversy over the use of the waitlist and abrupt closure.
- The closure of the drive while vacancies remain unfilled raises legal questions about administrative discretion versus judicial oversight.
- Current allegations suggest NHM acted arbitrarily by not appointing waitlisted candidates and violating natural justice principles.
- The case underscores the tension in public recruitment processes in India, with numerous vacancies still unresolved.
Grievance Against NHM & Court Order: The 17,000+ Recruitment Row in Uttar Pradesh
The National Health Mission (NHM), Uttar Pradesh, is currently at the center of a serious legal and administrative controversy. Indeed, a formal grievance against NHM & court order compliance has now reached the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The complaint alleges that Mission Director Pinky Jowel bypassed a High Court mandate. Specifically, she abruptly closed a massive recruitment drive for over 17,000 healthcare positions. Consequently, this dispute raises pointed questions about administrative discretion versus judicial oversight.
Background: The 17,000+ Recruitment Drive
To begin with, in November 2022, NHM Uttar Pradesh launched a large-scale recruitment drive (Advt No. 642/SPMU/NHM/2022-23/6200). The drive aimed to fill contractual vacancies for:
- ANM (Auxiliary Nurse Midwife)
- Pharmacists (Allopathic)
- Lab Technicians
- Staff Nurses
Officials declared results in October 2023. However, the process soon became contentious over how NHM used the “Wait List.” According to the original notification, NHM was to maintain a waitlist in a 1:3 ratio. This promise, in fact, now sits at the heart of the grievance against NHM & court order compliance.
The High Court Directive Behind This Grievance Against NHM & Court Order
Kanhaiya Lal and others filed a petition (Writ – A No. 14572 of 2024) over this issue. In response, the Allahabad High Court issued a specific order on October 21, 2024. Specifically, the court directed the Mission Director, NHM, to:
- Decide on the petitioners’ representation, dated 03.09.2024.
- Complete this review “in accordance with law” within a maximum of two months.
Therefore, the two-month clock on this court order began running that same month. As the next section shows, however, it did not run its full course before NHM acted.
Allegations of “Ultra Vires” Action
The complainant, Yogi M. P. Singh, alleges that NHM’s administration acted in bad faith. Specifically, on January 17, 2025, the Mission Director issued a notification (Ref. No. 642/SPMU/NHM/HR/Appt./2024-25/6871). This notification declared the recruitment drive closed — while the court’s two-month deadline was still active.
Several key points anchor this grievance against NHM & court order compliance:
- Violation of natural justice: Petitioners claim officials denied them a physical hearing despite repeated requests.
- Arbitrary closure: NHM closed the recruitment without appointing candidates from the waitlist, even though roughly 50% of vacancies reportedly remained unfilled.
- Departure from precedent: The grievance notes that NHM successfully appointed waitlisted candidates in earlier cycles, such as 2021-22.
The Multiple Selection Problem Behind the Vacant Seats
Notably, one major issue driving this dispute involves overlapping selections. Many candidates appeared on the merit lists for the same post — Staff Nurse, ANM, Lab Technician, or Pharmacist — across several different programs at once, including NUHM, DHS, Maternal Health, and RBSK. Since a candidate can only join one post, however, this overlap has produced thousands of “ghost vacancies.” These are seats marked “filled” on paper that remain empty in practice.
According to the complainant’s estimates, this overlap leaves close to 8,500+ seats unfilled — around 50% of the total vacancies. The table below summarizes the pattern:
| Post Category | Original Vacancies | Issue Identified |
|---|---|---|
| ANM | 5,689 | High overlap between Maternal Health and NUHM programs. |
| Staff Nurse | 7,706+ | Selection overlap across DHS, Child Health, and Community Process. |
| Lab Technician | 1,300+ | Overlap between the 15th Finance Commission and regular programs. |
For instance, the official merit lists show several candidates shortlisted for the same role across multiple programs. Among them: Lokesh Nagar (App No. NHMMP1358643) and Priyanka (App No. NHMMP1131880), both for Staff Nurse under NUHM. Similarly, Km Neha (App No. NHMMP1198418) and Anjali Chaudhary (App No. NHMMP1213685) both appear for ANM under NUHM. In each case, the candidate can accept only one post. As a result, the remaining program seats they were “selected” for stay vacant, unless NHM turns to the waitlist.
Consequently, petitioners argue that closing the drive while thousands of seats sit empty is “arbitrary and tyrannical” — especially since one person’s multiple qualifications caused the vacancy in the first place. By contrast, NHM did fill such resultant vacancies in the 2021-22 Staff Nurse recruitment (Advt No. 588), using the waitlist. Petitioners now cite that precedent directly in court.
Current Status of the Grievance Against NHM & Court Order
As of January 18, 2025, the grievance (Registration No. PMOPG/E/2025/0007902) remains under process. It is currently moving through these levels:
| Administrative Level | Officer Concerned | Current Action/Status |
|---|---|---|
| National (PMO) | Received on 18/01/2025 | Forwarded to the State Government |
| State (UP) | Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary) | Under process |
| Local (District) | DM, Sant Kabir Nagar | Disposed, with a note that the matter is state-level |
Meanwhile, the complainant also grounds the submission in Article 51-A of the Constitution. This article frames the citizen’s duty to safeguard public property and uphold the rule of law. The complainant argues this duty extends to challenging an ultra vires closure notice.
Potential Implications
If these allegations hold up, the closure notification could be deemed ultra vires — beyond NHM’s legal authority. After all, it directly contradicts the High Court’s order to weigh the petitioners’ representation first. Ultimately, therefore, this case highlights the ongoing tension between administrative discretion and judicial oversight in public recruitment. That tension is precisely why the grievance against NHM & court order compliance now sits with the PMO, rather than being resolved locally.
Contact and Reference Information
For readers following or engaging with this matter, the relevant official channels are:
- Recruitment Helpline: 0522-2630555
- Official NHM UP Website: upnrhm.gov.in
- Grievance Officer (Joint Secretary): Shri Arvind Mohan, 0522-2226350
- Email for Official Queries: arvind.12574@gov.in
- PMO Public Grievance Portal: pgportal.gov.in
A note on private data: application-level details such as candidates’ full names, father’s names, and application numbers come from official, publicly released merit lists. Personal contact details, such as phone numbers and private emails, are not published, in line with applicable privacy protections.
Overall, this dispute is far from settled. The grievance against NHM & court order compliance is still working through the PMO and state channels. Meanwhile, the underlying writ petition remains before the Allahabad High Court. Until either resolves, thousands of contractual healthcare positions across Uttar Pradesh hang in the balance.e channels, the underlying writ petition remains before the Allahabad High Court, and thousands of contractual healthcare positions across Uttar Pradesh hang in the balance until either is resolved.
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.